Allowed

Pakalapati Rajya Laxmi v. Smt. Vakati Karuna, I.a.S.and 3 others

Telangana HC6 Jan 2023CC/2025/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This contempt case alleged willful violation of an order directing disposal of a representation. The Court held that grievances regarding the disposal order should be raised in a challenge to that order, and closed the contempt case accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed. Pending miscellaneous petitions in the Contempt Case also closed.

Pakalapati Rajya Laxmi Vs Smt… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA , AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.MADHAVI DEVI

¶6

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2025 OF 2022

¶7

Contempt Case under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the Respondent herein for, willful violating, the Order of the High Court dated 1810712022 in W.P.No.29481 of 2022

¶8

Between:

¶9

Pakalapati Rajya Laxmi, Wo. R. Srinivasa Rao, Aged about 45 years, Occ. School Assistant (Phy.Science), Z.P.G.S., School, Manuguru Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶10

...Petitioner

¶11

AND

¶12

Smt. Vakati Karuna, l.A.S, Working as Principal Secretary to Government of
Telangana, School Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. Smt. Deva Sena, The Commissioner and Director of School Education,
Government of Telangana, lst Floor, C-Block. Saifabad, Hyderabad
3. Sri. E. Someshekar Sharma, The District Educational Officer, Khammam,
Khammam District.
4. S. yadaiah, The District Educational Officer, Bhadradri Kothagudem,
Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. A. PHANI BHUSHAN

¶15

¶16

Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: GP for Services -l i.e., School Education The Court made the following: ORDER

¶17

I I

¶18

THE HoNOURABLE sMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI nnvt

¶19

CONTEMPT CASB NO.2O25 oF 2022

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This Contempt Case has been filed alleging wilful disobedience and deliberate violation of the order of this Court dt.18.07.2022 in W.P.No.29481 of 2022, by the respondents.

¶22

On going through the order of this Court, it is noticed that the direction to the respondents was to dispose of the representation oi the petitioner dr.24.12.2021 within a period of six weeks from the date ol receipt of a copy of that order. Alleging that no decision was taken in accordance with the direction of this Court, the Contempt Case has been filed.

¶23

On issuance of notice, learned Govemment Pleader for ServicesJ has appeared on behalf of the contemnors and submitted that the representation of the petitioner has been disposed of vrde orders dt.10.10.2022. A copy o1'the order dt.10.10.2022 is furnished before this

Cour1.

C.C.No.2025 o12022

Though the leamed^{counsel for the petitioner submittedthat the} respondents have^{not consideredthe representationof the petitioner in} accordance with the factual^{positionand have shown discrimination,this} Court is of the^{opinionthatsuch grounds may have to be raised in the} petition filed by the^{petitionerchallengingthe impugnedorder} dt.10.10.2022.

¶29

In that view of^{the matter, the ContemptCase is closed'}

¶30

6 Pending miscellaneous^{petitions'if any, in this ContemptCase}

¶31

shall also stand closed.

¶32

/ SdI CH. VENKATESWARLU DEPUTY REGIYTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

Smt. Vakati Karuna, l.A.S., Working as Principal Secretary to Government of Telangana, School Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶38

Smt. Deva Sena, The Commissioner and Director of School Education, Government of Telangana, 1st Floor, C-Block. Saifabad, Hyderabad

¶39

Sri. E. Someshekar Sharma, The District Educational Officer, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶40

S. yadaiah, The District Educational Officer, Bhadradri Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶41

One CC to MR. A. PHANI BHUSHAN, Advocate [OPUC]

¶42

Two CD Copies

¶43

Two CC for GP for Services-|, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.(OUT)

kam

I I

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:0610112023

ORDER

CC.No.2025 of 2022

oe 1HE S T4 r{:
(i\
l
3 o4rtl2ui3
il

¶53

CLOSING OF TIIE CONTEMPT CASE.

¶54

@*"4 a.l .r3

Pakalapati Rajya Laxmi v. Smt. Vakati Karuna, I.a.S.and 3 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pakalapati Rajya Laxmi v. Smt. Vakati Karuna, I.a.S.and 3 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaik Rafi Ahmed and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana and 6 Others

The Indian Flume Pipe Co. Ltd. Vs The State of Telangana

C. Suryanarayana Vs State of Telangana

Nalla Vijendar Vs The State of Telangana and 8 others

M/ s. Mega Creations Vs The State of Telangana

Shak Nayeem Pasha Vs Smt. Vakati Karuna, I.A.S.